German national drug information service: user satisfaction and potential positive patient outcomes
- 268 Downloads
The pharmacist-run national German drug information service (DIS) has operated since 1988. Answering a steadily increasing demand over the past decade, our centre has, in total, provided information in more than 14,000 cases, mainly for community pharmacists. Information on user’s satisfaction and on possible direct or indirect benefits for patients is as yet scarce. Our objectives were to assess user’s satisfaction with the DIS and to identify any patient-related benefits based on the user’s judgment.
Independent national drug information centre at ABDA headquarters.
A questionnaire was developed, pre-tested, optimized, and used in daily practice over a period of one year (09/2003–08/2004). The questionnaire comprised seven items, aimed only at inquiries which pertained to a patient-related issue.
During the study period, a total of 1,639 inquiries were answered. Of these, 1,017 (62%) were eligible. The response rate was 45% (455/1,017). Ratings (1 = poor to 5 = very good, mean ± SD) showed positive evaluations for professional quality of advice␣(4.7 ± 0.5), clarity/understandability of advice (4.7 ± 0.5), timeliness of response (4.6 ± 0.7), and helpfulness regarding counselling patients and/or physicians (4.6 ± 0.6). Potential patient benefits could be identified in 42% of the cases that were available to follow-up (190/455).
This evaluation showed high satisfaction among users of a nationwide DIS, based on quality, understandability, timeliness, and helpfulness regarding counselling. According to its users, DIS was also able to provide positive patient outcomes.
KeywordsDrug information Evaluation Germany Guideline Patient outcomes Pharmacy practice Quality Questionnaire Satisfaction Survey
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
We sincerely thank our colleagues in the Centre for Drug Information and Pharmacy Practice (ZAPP), Margit Schmidt, Ralf Goebel Ph.D., Christiane Sauerwein, Susanne Roth, Nina Griese Ph.D., Karin Berger MPH, Christiane Eickhoff Ph.D., Uta Müller Ph.D. MPH, and Susanne vom Scheidt, for their ongoing and unrestricted support.
- 1.American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. ASHP guidelines on the provision of medication information by␣pharmacists. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1996;53:1843–5. http://www.ashp.org/bestpractices/medtherapy/Specific_Gdl_MedInfo.pdf (last accessed November 22, 2005)Google Scholar
- 9.Smith F. Research methods in pharmacy practice. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 2002Google Scholar
- 15.Litzinger A, Schweitzer E. Neue Wege einer intensivierten pharmazeutischen Betreuung. [New approaches of intensified pharmaceutical care.]. Krankenhauspharmazie 1998;19:9–13Google Scholar
- 16.Schuffels GT, Meek PD, Ploetz PA, Vermeulen LC. Optimierung der Arzneimitteltherapie im Krankenhaus [Optimization of drug therapy in the hospital setting]. Krankenhauspharmazie 1990;11:402–5Google Scholar